Mrs.Celine George. Vs. State of Kerala Representeld. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
[mr. justice anand byrareddy, j.] this writ petition is filed under article 226 of the constitution of india praying to call for the entire records concerning, connected with and relating to the order dated 23.07.1987 vide annexure-h peruse the same and set aside the order as unsustainable, particularly in the wake of the judgment and order dated 31.12.2002 by die learned civil judge (jr.dn) and jmfc, kanakapura in cc no.880/1986.1. the petitioner retired from service of the respondent as assistant editor grade-ii with effect from 31.12.2008. petitioner's grievance is that, the petitioner is not being paid retirement benefits like pension, gratuity, commuted value of pension, etc. the petitioner therefore seeks the following reliefs: "i) issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider and pass appropriate orders granting full pension to the petitioner, commuted pension, gratuity. ii) direct the 1st respondent to ratify the deputation period of the petitioner in the cochin university forthwith. iii) direct the 2nd respondent to grant increments for the period when she had availed with permission, medical leave, and refix the salary and pensionery benefits. iv) direct the respondents to grant the arrears of pensionery benefits as item (ii) above with in a time frame. v) direct the respondents to grant 18% interest on the above amount." 2. i have heard the learned government pleader, standing counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent and the standing counsel appearing for the 4th respondent. the delay in disbursal of retirement benefits due to the petitioner is on account of the fact that, pension contribution payable by the 4th respondent for the period the petitioner worked on deputation is not being paid by the 4th respondent. the counsel for the 2nd respondent has a contention that, the 4th respondent should also fix the pay and the pay fixation statement has to be approved by the 3rd respondent also. the counsel for the 4th respondent submits that, the amount demanded by the 2nd respondent is rs.75,984/- and the pension contribution payable by the 4th respondent in respect to the petitioner is only rs.67,560/-. he submits that, cheque for the said amount would be handed over to the 2nd respondent within two weeks. i am not going into the dispute regarding the amount. it is for the respondents 2 and 4 to settle the same between themselves. the correct amount of pension contribution payable by the 4th respondent in respect of the service of the petitioner shall be paid to the 2nd respondent by the 4th respondent within two weeks. the 3rd respondent shall consider the pay fixation statement in respect of the petitioner and pass orders and forward the same to the 2nd respondent within one month. the petitioner shall be paid all retirement benefits with arrears within one month therefrom. the petitioner's claim for increment shall be considered by the 2nd respondent and orders passed within the above said time limit.

Judgment:
1. The petitioner retired from service of the respondent as Assistant Editor Grade-II with effect from 31.12.2008. Petitioner's grievance is that, the petitioner is not being paid retirement benefits like pension, gratuity, commuted value of pension, etc. The petitioner therefore seeks the following reliefs:

"i) Issue a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider and pass appropriate orders granting full pension to the petitioner, Commuted pension, Gratuity.

ii) Direct the 1st respondent to ratify the deputation period of the petitioner in the Cochin University forthwith.

iii) Direct the 2nd respondent to grant increments for the period when she had availed with permission, medical leave, and refix the salary and pensionery benefits.

iv) Direct the respondents to grant the arrears of pensionery benefits as Item (ii) above with in a time frame.

v) Direct the respondents to grant 18% interest on the above amount."

2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader, standing counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent and the standing counsel appearing for the 4th respondent. The delay in disbursal of retirement benefits due to the petitioner is on account of the fact that, pension contribution payable by the 4th respondent for the period the petitioner worked on deputation is not being paid by the 4th respondent. The counsel for the 2nd respondent has a contention that, the 4th respondent should also fix the pay and the pay fixation statement has to be approved by the 3rd respondent also. The counsel for the 4th respondent submits that, the amount demanded by the 2nd respondent is Rs.75,984/- and the pension contribution payable by the 4th respondent in respect to the petitioner is only Rs.67,560/-. He submits that, cheque for the said amount would be handed over to the 2nd respondent within two weeks. I am not going into the dispute regarding the amount. It is for the respondents 2 and 4 to settle the same between themselves. The correct amount of pension contribution payable by the 4th respondent in respect of the service of the petitioner shall be paid to the 2nd respondent by the 4th respondent within two weeks. The 3rd respondent shall consider the pay fixation statement in respect of the petitioner and pass orders and forward the same to the 2nd respondent within one month. The petitioner shall be paid all retirement benefits with arrears within one month therefrom. The petitioner's claim for increment shall be considered by the 2nd respondent and orders passed within the above said time limit.